Putting the 2015 BMW F82 M4 7:52 laptime in context against the E92 and E46 M3's

Putting the 2015 BMW F82 M4 7:52 laptime in context against the E92 and E46 M3's

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Putting the 2015 BMW F82 M4 7:52 laptime in context against the E92 and E46 M3's

Sport Auto took the new 2015 F82 M4 out to the Nurburgring and as is customary when testing there recorded a laptime. So how did the car do? They managed a 7 minute and 52 second laptime in favorable conditions. The temperature during the lap attempt was 59 degrees so fairly cool. Additionally, the car had the high performance options available including the DCT transmission, carbon ceramic brakes, and Michelin Pilot Super Sport tires.

How does this laptime stand up against the E46 and E92 generation? Well, Sport Auto happened to test the E92 M3 GTS and recorded a 7:48. The E46 M3 CSL in Sport Auto's hands as well managed a 7:50. So, yes, technically the E92 M3 and E46 M3 have both posted quicker laptimes on the Nurburgring using the same source.

M4 fanboys will no doubt cry foul and state those two models are track specials and they are right. In the interest of fairness, Sport Auto in a standard manual E92 M3 lapped in 8:05 and did 8:22 with the standard E46 M3. Now these times are being mentioned to put this M4 lap in context but there will also be E46 M3 fanboys who will point out they did not have the same quality rubber available and E92 M3 fanboys who will say they did not have the same carbon ceramic brakes, or transmission, etc.

This is not a perfect science. Is the F82 M4 capable? Yes. But as the recent 427 wheel horsepower dyno shows one should expect a quicker laptime with that much power, carbon ceramic brakes, and a sub 3600 pound curb weight. The fact the E92 M3 GTS and E46 M3 CSL both lap quicker with much less power and torque definitely should help put the M4 laptime in perspective. As should the list of Nurburgring laptimes below.

At first I'm thinking...7:52? That's weak...but when you really start looking at it...not too many 4 passenger cars are above it on the list, and there's only what? Maybe one straight away where brute power really makes up for anything in the turns. I think BMW built another great car but no doubt they are focusing on straight line performance and luxury. Hey, that's what the consumers are demanding though, so I'm ok with that, and still respectable on the track IMO. Gotta say though, if you're looking for a sports car for pure performance in that price range. The corvette is just so far ahead of everyone else per dollar it is insane. GTR too, but still...an extra $30-40k depending on packages

Sooooo what youre saying here is that the e92 base car should've been faster than the csl? But it wasn't. The gts was only marginally faster than the csl. Mind you the csl was on a dot street tire damn near slick. I'd say it's a damn strong car. However, like all other Bmw's very slow times at the ring but a huge improvement.

ohhhhhhhhh and before I forget, how much did the gts cost? For how many seconds per lap quicker? Oh that's right it doesn't matter, not only are they extremely limited but it's not for sale in the US. But who cares, the M4 is 4 seconds slower.

Has anyone ever posted an official ring time for the e9x M3 DCT/DSG? I am curious to see what the difference would be over the course of 13-14 miles. F1 claims that they shifted 60 times over the 3.2 mile version of the circuit - would imagine it's a decent amount more on the full track. Point is, I could see a decent difference between a DSG optioned M3 and a DCT - but am not sure how much.

If the times don't exist for the difference (between the M3s) - I am sure someone has published numbers for another manual vs. dual clutch car... Got me curious now.

Sooooo what youre saying here is that the e92 base car should've been faster than the csl? But it wasn't. The gts was only marginally faster than the csl. Mind you the csl was on a dot street tire damn near slick. I'd say it's a damn strong car. However, like all other Bmw's very slow times at the ring but a huge improvement.

ohhhhhhhhh and before I forget, how much did the gts cost? For how many seconds per lap quicker? Oh that's right it doesn't matter, not only are they extremely limited but it's not for sale in the US. But who cares, the M4 is 4 seconds slower.

Yeah, I think i'd rather see some lap times at some US tracks like road america, sebring, or laguna seca. Especially sebring since it's actually close enough for me to drive to for weekend events.

This S65 fan boy $#@! here is annoying. That's why I spend less time here lately.

Because you have trouble somehow understanding multiple M models were made and ran on the ring by the same source and you don't like that the quickest of them around the ring had an S65? Sorry about that.

All the times are listed to get a complete picture from all the cars. You're acting like a fanboy.

Sooooo what youre saying here is that the e92 base car should've been faster than the csl? But it wasn't. The gts was only marginally faster than the csl. Mind you the csl was on a dot street tire damn near slick. I'd say it's a damn strong car. However, like all other Bmw's very slow times at the ring but a huge improvement.

ohhhhhhhhh and before I forget, how much did the gts cost? For how many seconds per lap quicker? Oh that's right it doesn't matter, not only are they extremely limited but it's not for sale in the US. But who cares, the M4 is 4 seconds slower.

How much does a C63 Black Series cost over a C63? A 911 GT3 over a 911 Carrera? Once you want to start shaving seconds it adds up.

The main difference is that with those cars you get adjustable suspension and aerodynamics meaning if you are serious you tailor your car to the track. Same thing with the GTS. They also are designed for multiple laps at WOT, not limp mode.

Of course but we can't skip to the future or make BMW create models to appease someone on a forum who doesn't like that there are quicker previous generation M cars.

As stated the GTS would be superior around the track and it is. The article states putting the laptime in context against the E46 and E92 and provides the laptimes for both and both M models. It doesn't say anything about putting it in context only against the base models to appease sensitivities. It's really comical anyone takes issue with all the times being presented. Yeah, such fanboyism to list both so people can come to their own conclusion. Lulz.

The E92 M3 GTS was also run on Pirelli p zero Corsa tires which are Semi-Slick competition tires with a wear rating of 60 clearly racing tires. The m4 was running regular max performance Michelin Pilot Super Sports with a wear rating of 300 which are worlds apart from the Pirellis on the GTS. Tire change alone could make up that time plus more. Pretty impressive

The E92 M3 GTS was also run on Pirelli p zero Corsa tires which are Semi-Slick competition tires with a wear rating of 60 clearly racing tires. The m4 was running regular max performance Michelin Pilot Super Sports with a wear rating of 300 which are worlds apart from the Pirellis on the GTS. Tire change alone could make up that time plus more. Pretty impressive

Carbon ceramic brakes could make a big difference. Track temp could make a big difference.

Carbon ceramic brakes could make a big difference. Track temp could make a big difference.

Changing the suspension, aero, etc.

It is what it is.

Carbon ceramics deff make a big difference just on unsprung weight savings alone. Deff impressive but id like to see how it reacts to a 15-20 minute session in summer heat. The temps were pretty good for this test and the ring is a high speed track so the coolers got plenty of air.

Carbon ceramics deff make a big difference just on unsprung weight savings alone. Deff impressive but id like to see how it reacts to a 15-20 minute session in summer heat. The temps were pretty good for this test and the ring is a high speed track so the coolers got plenty of air.

The temps were really good and people are missing that.

I know what the better track cars are. The M4 has a straightline and power emphasis now. It obviously doesn't handle poorly by any means.

I know what the better track cars are. The M4 has a straightline and power emphasis now. It obviously doesn't handle poorly by any means.

The GTS was ran in September, hardly extreme heat in Germany at that time. Put all 3 on the same tires and I am willing to bet your eyes will open. It takes a lot more than some CC brakes to drop a dramatic amount of time. It will take damn near reinventing the wheel. Compare the earliest Z06's 7:49 to the most recent 7:22.6 time. They didn't change HP, they did it revising suspension, tires, aero, and brakes. Add some aftermarket components and you're golden on the M4.

I also do not understand your argument. You're talking about fanboys where in reality you're the one who is not impressed with the M4's lap times, quoting the GTS and CSL. Let's focus on both of the models. They both cost nearly double of their based models. The GTS is only 4 seconds faster on a higher rated tire. Tire makes all the difference in this equation. What's not to see about that? You can't go and buy a GTS but you can go and buy the M4. The M4 has more than just power in a straighline and clearly the lap times show.